On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:28 PM Siddharth Asthana <siddharthasthana31@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In this patch series we didn't want to change that '%(objectsize)' > always shows the size of the original object even when `--use-mailmap` > is set because first we have the long term plan to unify how the formats > for `git cat-file` and other commands works. And second existing formats > like the "pretty formats" used bt `git log` have different options for s/used bt/used by/ > fields respecting mailmap or not respecting it (%an is for author name > while %aN for author name respecting mailmap). [...] > = Patch Organization > > - The first patch makes `-s` option to return updated size of the > <commit/tag> object, when combined with `--use-mailmap` option, after > replacing the idents using the mailmap mechanism. > - The second patch makes `--batch-check` option to return updated size of > the <commit/tag> object, when combined with `--use-mailmap` option, > after replacing the idents using the mailmap mechanism. > - The third patch improves the documentation of `-s`, `--batch`, > `--batch-check` and `--batch-command` options by adding they can be > combined with `--use-mailmap` options. So the documentation patch is now part of this small series again. Even if this documentation patch is a bug fix, it might be better at this point to squash this patch into the patches 1/3 and 2/3. At least I think that would better follow Junio's last comments about this. If you go this way, you might want to squash the documentation parts about -s from patch 3/3 into patch 1/3 and the rest of patch 3/3 into patch 2/3. > = Changes in v4 > > - Improve the documentation patch to clearly state that the `-s`, > `--batch-check`, `--batch-command` and `--batch` options can be only > be used with `--textconv`, `--filters` or `--use-mailmap`. Here I think you should say that the documentation patch is part of this series again and explain a bit why. Anyway I took a look at the actual patches in this series and they look good to me now. So I would be Ok to merge it either as is or with patch 3/3 squashed into patches 1/3 and 2/3 as discussed above. Thanks!
